Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

De-escalating social media conflict

nickpunt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

331–340 of 350 posts

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#331

Post by foldr »

brigandish wrote: post #329
foldr wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My original post obviously did not contain a "threat". The rest of what you're saying similarly seems to be based on a misconceptions. I think my previous comments speak for themselves, so I'll leave it here.

> "unwise" reads like a threat reads like . I asked you to clarify but all you've done is dig yourself in, ironically on a post about providing mea culpa. If you don't wish to clarify, that's your decision, but please show some awareness in the way you write as what else should one conclude other than you really wanted someone else to shut up? The absence of any other explanation and your unwillingness to avoid clari…

I just meant that it's unwise, i.e. not a good idea, to suggest in passing that BLM is an inherently violent movement, as this kind of inaccurate and unnecessarily inflammatory statement is not likely to lead to a productive discussion. I am not sure why you think I meant anything else.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#332

Post by thinkingemote »

JoeSmithson wrote: post #277
garraeth wrote: post #271

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Forgiveness requiring an apology isn't true forgiveness, it's more akin to revenge. And if you wait for an apology, you'll never be able to forgive, remove that burden from yourself, from those who have wronged you who are dead. Many instances of anger and a lack of forgiveness are multi-generational - or even parent/child. People can rightly forgive without the other party even knowing about it. In fact, I'd argue t…

I don't think there's anything unusual about being prepared to forgive someone who is contrite and has apologised, but not being able to if they are unrepentant. It's nothing like revenge.

Forgiveness gives most benefit for yourself. If I forgive you, I feel better and can move on.

If I don't forgive you until you do something I expect, then I will continue to feel worse and you will be the cause. It's better just to forgive.

If someone has done wrong and they know it, they may not want to forgive themselves, but it shouldn't stop others forgiving them

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#333

Post by wffurr »

wffurr wrote: post #238
thinkingemote wrote: post #213

Forgiveness. Rather than encourage better behaviours of those targeted by the mob, it would be better to encourage better behaviours of the mob itself. Forgiveness is absent in every social media or comment section and yet it's one of the crucial ways we get along with people. Having others visibly but perhaps silently forgive another would allow social proof that its okay to forgive this perceived offender. Forgiven…

The author goes into that in the next section of the article. Forgiveness starts with an apology.

This whole thread is a disaster of people not reading the article or even discussing it really. You are all instead just holding forth on your pet theories of shame/forgiveness/face-saving social interactions. It doesn't even have the benefit of being interesting or based on research.

I do not forgive you all for not reading or discussing the article, at least not until you all apologize and post something interesting relevant to the article.

I do, however, give myself permission to file this away under "topics HN can't reasonably discuss", which is unfortunate because the design of our social media systems, reifying cultural norms, is super important to today's society and discourse.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#334

Post by thinkingemote »

wffurr wrote: post #333
wffurr wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The author goes into that in the next section of the article. Forgiveness starts with an apology.

This whole thread is a disaster of people not reading the article or even discussing it really. You are all instead just holding forth on your pet theories of shame/forgiveness/face-saving social interactions. It doesn't even have the benefit of being interesting or based on research. I do not forgive you all for not reading or discussing the article, at least not until you all apologize and post something interestin…

I forgive you.

Forgiveness doesn't start with an apology. I forgive you which makes me feel better and to let you know that you shouldn't feel bad.

I also do not expect an apology nor for you to forgive me in return. Forgiveness is a gift.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#335

Post by wffurr »

thinkingemote wrote: post #334
wffurr wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This whole thread is a disaster of people not reading the article or even discussing it really. You are all instead just holding forth on your pet theories of shame/forgiveness/face-saving social interactions. It doesn't even have the benefit of being interesting or based on research. I do not forgive you all for not reading or discussing the article, at least not until you all apologize and post something interestin…

I forgive you. Forgiveness doesn't start with an apology. I forgive you which makes me feel better and to let you know that you shouldn't feel bad. I also do not expect an apology nor for you to forgive me in return. Forgiveness is a gift.

That's great. I'm happy for you.

Do you want to discuss the article? e.g. forgiveness in the context of social media systems? What you're demonstrating is "performative forgiveness" in public, which is pretty counter to the usual experience of forgiveness in offline culture.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#336

Post by shadowgovt »

nullc wrote: post #129
shadowgovt wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A badly-executed apology divorced from change makes things worse.

No, any admission of fault or error makes things worse. The public is utterly bombarded with claims that this or that person or group was wrong or did wrong with respect to something or another. It's extremely difficult to sort out which of these allegations are true or false. Unless you admit fault, then its obvious to everyone.

I've heard this argument made (I believe I've even made it myself at some point), but in practice, it turns out to be less effective than people think. "Be silent and it'll just blow over" is increasingly ineffective as a strategy because the Internet has a longer memory; as one looks up information on a person, allegations will jump to the surface. And increasingly, people seem to assume that absence of a counterpoint is implicit admission of possible truth (there's the perpetual "when will you stop beating your wife" argument, but a lot of other allegations are in far more plausible categories, where silence can imply a lack of ability to defend one's reputation).

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#337

Post by notSupplied »

umvi wrote: post #52
FooBarWidget wrote: post #5

Even increasing the content limit will go a long way towards deescalation. I find that, on Twitter, one often has to resort to oversimplified hyperbole and sarcasm because it's very difficult to fit more thoughtful and nuanced messages in the content limit. Yes it's possible to write multiple tweets. But that takes significantly more effort.

Then you'll just get increasingly large walls of text as each person refutes every single sentence + adds a few more zingers of their own

The thing is, a long wall of text usually reveals how truly eloquent and thoughtful the writer is.

In a mere 280 characters, some random person could sound just as smart as Paul Graham. It is the essays that set them apart, and not easily replicated the by drive-by-reply-guy.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#338

Post by nullc »

shadowgovt wrote: post #336
nullc wrote: post #129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, any admission of fault or error makes things worse. The public is utterly bombarded with claims that this or that person or group was wrong or did wrong with respect to something or another. It's extremely difficult to sort out which of these allegations are true or false. Unless you admit fault, then its obvious to everyone.

I've heard this argument made (I believe I've even made it myself at some point), but in practice, it turns out to be less effective than people think. "Be silent and it'll just blow over" is increasingly ineffective as a strategy because the Internet has a longer memory; as one looks up information on a person, allegations will jump to the surface. And increasingly, people seem to assume that absence of a counterpoi…

I agree with what you're saying there, but instead of responding by apologizing people are often still better off by going on the attack, calling the allegations baseless nonsense, or personally attacking the people spreading them.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#339

Post by TheKarateKid »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #221
rexgallorum2 wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very good observation. The significance of an apology is entirely dependent on the cultural context. The fallout from BP Deepwater Horizon oil spill comes to mind. British executives failed to provide the gushing (but meaningless) apology the Americans expected until it was too late, and they were skewered in the American press for it. And that particular example concerns two closely related cultures. The results are…

BP did a lot more to admit culpability than Exxon did with the Valdeez. BP was penalised more than Exxon because of this.

The higher penalties was probably the result of more than just admission by BP. Environmentalism had much more of a focus by both the American public and the presidential administration than it did with Exxon’s disaster. The calls for consequences were much louder and supported.

Re: De-escalating social media conflict

#340

Post by ca98am79 »

I was reading the book "Nonviolent Communication" by Marshall Rosenberg and it made me think it would be nice to have a plugin when posting to social media that pre-formatted your tweet/post in a non-violent way. I think this would really help and I would use it, but probably not many people would use it.

I ended up just deleting my social media accounts and I feel better already

Post reply on HN